If the question is, “Does this sound horrible, immoral, and/or disturbing,” the answer is “Of course.”
If the question is, “Is this illegal,” the answer is no.
If the question is, “Should any prominent man who took part in this be ashamed of himself, and would it serve him right to get outed,” the answer is “Definitely.”
It seems to have become the new normal now that liberal women are fine prescribing what other women may do.
You should watch the video a few posts up and stop fantasising.
They were handed a multi-page non-disclosure agreement that they weren’t allowed enough time to read and weren’t allowed to keep a copy of the when they showed up for work.
I don’t know if you, as employer do that (especially when providing sexy clothing) if you are comfortable about what you are doing.
Personally I haven’t ever been presented with an employment agreement that I wasn’t allowed to read or have a copy of…which just seems weird.
If you read the original article (here) it’s pretty clear that a) there were women there did not know what they were getting into, b) there were women there who were in fear of the guests, c) the hostesses were **not **told that they would be groped, and d) the management went to some lengths to gradually reduce the hostesses’ ability to provide consent.
The escalation of control by the agency is really quite something:
Take away people’s means of contacting help, isolate them from support, get them to sign a legal document unread and then police their attempts to remove themselves from a situation they’re unhappy with. These are not the actions of people who are convinced that their staff know what they’re letting themselves in for and are completely OK with it. They are the actions of people who know that a significant percentage of their staff are going to be distressed and unhappy and want to stop them doing anything about it.
Well that settles it… if some women are okay with this, it’s okay to do it to any woman!
Why should they be ashamed if all they did was eat a dinner, donate $$, drink some fine stuff and ogle some women in short skirts? They were told they werent supposed to harrass the hostesses.
No one was saying most attendees did anything wrong, and in fact the allegations of some of the worst behaviour have been unsubstanciated.
Sensationalised garbage.
Nope, only the ones that were warned and piad well for attending.
It’s very clear from reading the article that many of the women were not warned of what might actually be done to them.
Cite?
They [del]bought their tickets[/del] took a food service job, they knew what they were getting into. I say, let 'em [del]crash[/del] get molested.
Get with the times - the operative phrase is “Fake news!”.
But I was reliably assured that the only reason they didn’t know was because they were “were doing twitter instead of listening to the breifings”!
Are you assuming that hostess work typically involves being fondled? They were warned that some of he men could be “annoying” and is very different than acceptance of sexual assault.
Have you not been reading this thread?
“The hostesses were asked to sign a five-page non-disclosure agreement and in brochures handed out at the event the Presidents Club said it would “not tolerate any form of harassment towards event attendees or staff,” defining it as behavior that causes someone to feel “offended, intimidated or humiliated.””
There are also reports in the article from women who felt some variation of unsafe, humiliated, offended, intimidated, etc.
Last time I checked, sexual assault was illegal in the U.S. I’ll bet it’s illegal in the UK as well.
What alternate universe are you getting this from??
Hooter’s (an American restaurant chain)? Certainly not. The waitresses there are look-but-no-touch.
But on the other hand, the women at the Spearmint Rhinoceros do allow (and are compensated for) some level of nudity and contact.
I enjoy both places and respect the rules in both.
Is this situation more like the former or the latter? Would it matter to you if they hired only strippers for the job?
Obviously assault is a crime. Is this a crime under either British or moral law?
If you read the muck raking article, everyone who was willing to put their name forward said nothing much happened. The allegations are all anonomous and out of line with what many others said happened.
From the ft.com link:
I’d have to wonder about just how binding that NDA would be under those circumstances.
And then there was this:
If you set up a situation where female workers aren’t allowed to escape harassment, at a party where this sort of thing has clearly been tolerated year after year, a statement that you accept no responsibility when it happens isn’t likely to get you off the hook, IMH and non-lawyerly O.
Gee, they’re all forced to sign a NDA that they don’t even have the opportunity to read, even afterwards. And for some odd reason, those people who are willing to go on the record say nothing much happened, and those who say bad shit went down aren’t willing to give their names.
Hooda thunkit?
Well, do you think it’s plausible that at least some of these women thought they were being hired to be like Hooter’s servers, not like strippers?
And, because I really don’t know, in a place where “some level of physical contact is allowed”, is it really legally and ethically acceptable to grab a woman without some sort of consent/acknowledgment? Do you really just grab the tits or ass of a woman as she walks by, or take out your dick where you know it will be seen? In my mind, even in a strip joint, a lap dance is a negotiated thing, and in general contact happens in ways that allow the woman to have lots of opportunities to invite or reject it–and if it’s rejected, that rejection is respected and enforced by the powers that be. It doesn’t sound like any of that was true here, and that’s a big difference.